DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of a City-Level Minimum-Wage Policy on Supermarket Food Prices in Seattle-King County

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Impact of a City-Level Minimum-Wage Policy on Supermarket Food Prices in Seattle-King County International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article The Impact of a City-Level Minimum-Wage Policy on Supermarket Food Prices in Seattle-King County Jennifer J. Otten 1,* ID , James Buszkiewicz 2 ID , Wesley Tang 2, Anju Aggarwal 2, Mark Long 3 ID , Jacob Vigdor 3 and Adam Drewnowski 2 1 Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, Center for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle 98195, WA, USA 2 Epidemiology, Center for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle 98195, WA, USA; [email protected] (J.B.); [email protected] (W.T.); [email protected] (A.A.); [email protected] (A.D.) 3 Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Washington, Seattle 98195, WA, USA; [email protected] (M.L.); [email protected] (J.V.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 June 2017; Accepted: 6 September 2017; Published: 9 September 2017 Abstract: Background: Many states and localities throughout the U.S. have adopted higher minimum wages. Higher labor costs among low-wage food system workers could result in higher food prices. Methods: Using a market basket of 106 foods, food prices were collected at affected chain supermarket stores in Seattle and same-chain unaffected stores in King County (n = 12 total, six per location). Prices were collected at 1 month pre- (March 2015) and 1-month post-policy enactment (May 2015), then again 1-year post-policy enactment (May 2016). Unpaired t-tests were used to detect price differences by location at fixed time while paired t-tests were used to detect price difference across time with fixed store chain. A multi-level, linear differences-in-differences model, was used to detect the changes in the average market basket item food prices over time across regions, overall and by food group. Results: There were no significant differences in overall market basket or item-level costs at one-month (−$0.01, SE = 0.05, p = 0.884) or one-year post-policy enactment (−$0.02, SE = 0.08, p = 0.772). No significant increases were observed by food group. Conclusions: There is no evidence of change in supermarket food prices by market basket or increase in prices by food group in response to the implementation of Seattle’s minimum wage ordinance. Keywords: minimum wage; market basket; food cost; supermarkets; food price 1. Introduction An increasing number of cities and municipalities across the United States have raised, or are considering raising, their minimum wage with the intent of improving the well-being of low-wage workers and their families [1,2]. Only a few studies have investigated the effects of minimum wage policies on food security, diet quality, and associated health outcomes, such as obesity and diabetes [3–8]. In addition, potential mediating factors of the relationships between minimum wage and health, such as food prices, need to be explored in greater detail. This is a particularly salient issue for lower income households, including minimum wage workers, who have lower quality diets and are at higher risk for obesity and type 2 diabetes [9,10]. The relationship between higher minimum wage and higher food prices could be significant. The U.S. food system is the largest employer of minimum wage workers, accounting for nearly one-third of the total share of low-wage workers in the nation [11]. Policies that increase minimum wage will likely increase labor costs which may result in a higher cost of business. In turn, these increased costs may be passed through the system to consumer food prices [12]. Given that lower income households spend a higher proportion of disposable income on food, they will be more vulnerable to any increase in Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1039; doi:10.3390/ijerph14091039 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1039 2 of 12 food costs [13]. Published studies have already shown those earning minimum or low wages struggle with purchasing diets of sufficient nutritional value for health [9,14–17]. Of particular public health concern is the potential detrimental impact that added food costs could have on diet quality due to the typically higher price of healthier foods [16–18]. The magnitude of such effects may also vary based on the size of a minimum wage increase and whether it is experienced at a federal or local level. One study, conducted in 2000, modeled a $0.50 increase, separately for the 1992 and 1997 federal minimum wage, on food prices and concluded that small increases in the federal minimum wage would exert a less than 1% increase in food prices, even when the full labor prices were passed through to food consumers [19]. However, there was indication by study authors that larger minimum wage increases could result in greater food price increases [19]. Another study, conducted in 2012, forecasted that a 33% increase to federal minimum wage would increase retail grocery store food prices, on average, by less than 0.5% per year [11]. Both of these studies modeled a one-time increase on the federal minimum wage and used simulated rather than primary data. It is unknown whether wage increases that are larger, more localized, or phased-in incrementally over multiple consecutive years would produce different results. In June 2014, the City of Seattle passed an ordinance mandating a $15 hourly minimum wage for businesses; it was enacted on 1 April 2015 [20,21]. The implementation of this policy is occurring over several years, with wage increases annually, until $15/hour is reached—a level that will be achieved between 2019 and 2021, depending on the size of the business and whether they offer medical benefits to their employees. This local minimum wage policy is providing an opportunity to prospectively collect and examine data on local food prices in response to real-time and incremental increases in wages over multiple years as the policy is phased in. The primary purpose of this study is to examine immediate and short-term effects of Seattle’s minimum wage policy on local supermarket food prices after enactment of the policy. Because the policy was only targeted for businesses based in the City of Seattle, we were able to include in our sample both supermarket chains affected by the policy in Seattle and nearby, same-chain supermarkets not directly affected by the policy in King County. To assess the public health implications of potential differential price changes on specific items, such as fruits and vegetables, we also conducted a secondary analysis of the data by food group. 2. Methods 2.1. Study Design The Seattle Minimum Wage Ordinance was adopted in June 2014 and designed such that minimum wage increases will be phased in variably between 2015 and 2019–2021 [20,22]. The policy phase-in schedule is based on both the size of the business and whether the business contributes to health insurance benefits for its workers [20,21]. As of its initial phase-in on April 1, 2015, the city’s minimum wage increased from $9.47/hour to $11/hour for most large (≥500 employees nationally) and some small businesses (<500 employees) and $10/hour for other small businesses. On 1 January 2016, the city’s minimum wage increased from $11/hour to $13/hour for most large (≥500 employees nationally) and some small businesses (<500 employees). Our study used a pre-post research design to evaluate these first two phase-ins. Supermarket price data were collected from affected and unaffected supermarkets in Seattle and King County at three time points: baseline, which was 1-month before the enactment of the ordinance (March 2015); follow-up, which was 1-month after enactment of the ordinance (May 2015) and the initial phase-in; and follow-up 2, which was 1-year after enactment of the ordinance (May 2016), a seasonal match to follow-up 1, and after the second phase-in. 2.2. Store Selection The ordinance applied to 19 supermarket chains in Seattle (78 individual stores) as identified through food establishment permits provided by Public Health-Seattle and King County [9,17,23]. We Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1039 3 of 12 narrowed the sample to six large supermarket chains inside Seattle (the “intervention” group) and six same-chain supermarkets outside Seattle but in King County (the comparison group) that were in operation during the study period. This decision was based on budget constraints and three criteria: (1) the chain had locations both inside Seattle and in surrounding King County (n = 13 of 19 chains), (2) prior research showing that, in a representative sample of Seattle and King County residents, 65% named these chains as their primary food source (n = seven of 19 chains) and, (3) to incorporate variability in market basket cost, from low price to high price [23]. The latter was determined using data from a 2009 study on market basket prices of supermarkets in King County, which illustrated that prices for the same market basket could range by store chain from $218 to $406 [23]. In addition, the six chains included in the sample represented 50 out of the 78 individual Seattle stores impacted by the ordinance. The locations of individual stores within each chain were then selected based on their proximity to lower income neighborhoods, based on methodology from previous studies [9,17,23]. Four of the six supermarket chains had employee union representation. 2.3. CPHN Market Basket The use of a market basket to assess food price is common [9,16,17,23,24]. The federal government uses the USDA Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) market basket of foods to calculate the minimal cost of a nutritionally balanced diet to inform food assistance programs and the U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Burgernomics: a Big Mac Guide to Purchasing Power Parity
    Burgernomics: A Big Mac™ Guide to Purchasing Power Parity Michael R. Pakko and Patricia S. Pollard ne of the foundations of international The attractive feature of the Big Mac as an indi- economics is the theory of purchasing cator of PPP is its uniform composition. With few power parity (PPP), which states that price exceptions, the component ingredients of the Big O Mac are the same everywhere around the globe. levels in any two countries should be identical after converting prices into a common currency. As a (See the boxed insert, “Two All Chicken Patties?”) theoretical proposition, PPP has long served as the For that reason, the Big Mac serves as a convenient basis for theories of international price determina- market basket of goods through which the purchas- tion and the conditions under which international ing power of different currencies can be compared. markets adjust to attain long-term equilibrium. As As with broader measures, however, the Big Mac an empirical matter, however, PPP has been a more standard often fails to meet the demanding tests of elusive concept. PPP. In this article, we review the fundamental theory Applications and empirical tests of PPP often of PPP and describe some of the reasons why it refer to a broad “market basket” of goods that is might not be expected to hold as a practical matter. intended to be representative of consumer spending Throughout, we use the Big Mac data as an illustra- patterns. For example, a data set known as the Penn tive example. In the process, we also demonstrate World Tables (PWT) constructs measures of PPP for the value of the Big Mac sandwich as a palatable countries around the world using benchmark sur- measure of PPP.
    [Show full text]
  • Math Calculations to Better Utilize CPI Data
    Math calculations to better utilize CPI data Report prepared by Gerald Perrins, branch chief of Consumer Prices in the Mid-Atlantic region, and Diane Nilsen, former regional clearance officer in the National Office of Field Operations, Bureau of Labor Statistics. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is published points, because index point changes are as an index number that shows the change in affected by the level of the index in relation to the price of a defined market basket of goods its base period, while percent changes are not. and services over time from a base period which is defined as 100.0. An increase of 7 The following illustration shows a percent from that base period, for example, is hypothetical CPI one-month change between shown as 107.0. Alternately, that relationship April 2016 and May 2016 using the 1982- can also be expressed as the price of a base 84=100 reference base. period "market basket" of goods and services rising from $100 to $107. Currently, the Reference Base reference base for most CPI indexes is 1982- 1982-84=100 84=100 but some indexes have other May 2016 ........................................ 240.236 references bases. The reference base years April 2016 ....................................... 239.261 refer to the period in which the index is set to Index point change .............................. 0.975 100.0. In addition, expenditure weights are Divided by the earlier index ..... 0.975/239.261 updated every two years to keep the CPI Equals ............................................... 0.004075 current with changing consumer preferences. Multiplied by 100 ............................... 0.4075 Equals percent change ........................ 0.4 Index numbers are not dollar values, but measures of the change over time relative to Over-the-year percent change their base period value of 100.0 (for example, To arrive at a percent change over an entire 280.0 or 30.3).
    [Show full text]
  • AP Macroeconomics: Vocabulary 1. Aggregate Spending (GDP)
    AP Macroeconomics: Vocabulary 1. Aggregate Spending (GDP): The sum of all spending from four sectors of the economy. GDP = C+I+G+Xn 2. Aggregate Income (AI) :The sum of all income earned by suppliers of resources in the economy. AI=GDP 3. Nominal GDP: the value of current production at the current prices 4. Real GDP: the value of current production, but using prices from a fixed point in time 5. Base year: the year that serves as a reference point for constructing a price index and comparing real values over time. 6. Price index: a measure of the average level of prices in a market basket for a given year, when compared to the prices in a reference (or base) year. 7. Market Basket: a collection of goods and services used to represent what is consumed in the economy 8. GDP price deflator: the price index that measures the average price level of the goods and services that make up GDP. 9. Real rate of interest: the percentage increase in purchasing power that a borrower pays a lender. 10. Expected (anticipated) inflation: the inflation expected in a future time period. This expected inflation is added to the real interest rate to compensate for lost purchasing power. 11. Nominal rate of interest: the percentage increase in money that the borrower pays the lender and is equal to the real rate plus the expected inflation. 12. Business cycle: the periodic rise and fall (in four phases) of economic activity 13. Expansion: a period where real GDP is growing. 14. Peak: the top of a business cycle where an expansion has ended.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Price Indexes
    INFORMATION BRIEF Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 Pat Dalton, Legislative Analyst, 651-296-7434 Kathy Novak, Legislative Analyst, 651-296-9253 Updated: November 2009 Using Price Indexes This information brief is a nontechnical guide to the use of price indexes. It explains the difference among the three most commonly used price indexes and suggests when each index should be used. Additionally, this information brief shows how to make some common calculations using price indexes. Contents Price Indexes and Their Uses ...........................................................................................................2 Descriptions of the Major Price Indexes ..........................................................................................2 Gross Domestic Product Chain-Weighted Price Index ..............................................................2 Consumer Price Index (CPI) ......................................................................................................4 Producer Price Index (PPI) ........................................................................................................5 Glossary of Price Index Terms ........................................................................................................7 Common Calculations Using Price Indexes ....................................................................................8 Summary of Major Price Indexes ..................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • The Market Basket Powerpoint Lesson Plan
    FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ST. LOUIS ECONOMIC EDUCATION The Market Basket PowerPoint Lesson Plan Lesson Author Jeannette Bennett, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis —Memphis Branch Standards and Benchmarks (see page 12) Lesson Description In this lesson, students will compare the price of goods from one time period to another and through discussion and role play interpret the effects of inflation on con - sumers. They will categorize goods and services according to the eight major groups of the consumer price index (CPI) and be able to determine the difference between the CPI and the core CPI. Grade Level 9-12 Time Required 60-90 minutes Concepts Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Consumer price index (CPI) Core CPI Goods Inflation Inflation rate Purchasing power Services ©2013, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Permission is granted to reprint or photocopy this lesson in its entirety for educational purposes, provided the user credits the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, www.stlouisfed.org/education_resources. 1 PowerPoint Lesson Plan The Market Basket Objectives Students will • define inflation, inflation rate, consumer price index (CPI), and core CPI; • explain how inflation affects purchasing power; • determine the price of goods and services from one year to another as adjusted for inflation by using an online calculator; • identify the categories of consumer spending included in the CPI and the core CPI; and • explain a role of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Materials • PowerPoint presentation “The Market Basket” • Handout 1, one copy cut apart, making eight strips • Handout 2, one copy for each student • Handout 3, one copy for each student • One first-class postage stamp to use as a visual • Internet access Procedure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Facts About the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
    The four surveys used in the Effects of the CPI Facts construction of the CPI The CPI can be used to measure and compare about the Telephone Point-of-Purchase Survey consumers’ purchasing power in different time (TPOPS) — This household survey, conducted periods. As prices increase, the purchasing Consumer by the U.S. Census Bureau for BLS, provides the power of a consumer’s dollar declines, and as sampling frame for the Commodities and Services prices decrease, the consumer’s purchasing Price Index Pricing Survey. Roughly 30,000 households are power increases. (CPI) interviewed each year and asked to identify the The CPI is often used to adjust consumers’ “points” at which they purchase consumer items. income payments. For example, the CPI is This gives BLS a list of grocery stores, department used to adjust Social Security benefits, to adjust stores, doctor’s offices, theaters, internet sites, income eligibility levels for government assistance, shopping malls, etc., currently patronized by urban and to automatically provide cost-of-living wage consumers. adjustments to millions of American workers. Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) — This household survey, conducted by the U.S. Census The CPI affects more than 100 million persons Bureau for BLS, provides information on the as a result of statutory action: buying habits of American consumers. More than 7,000 families from around the country Over 50 million Social Security beneficiaries provide information each calendar quarter on their About 20 million food stamp recipients in the spending habits in the Quarterly Interview Survey, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and another 7,000 families complete expense diaries (SNAP) in the Diary Survey each year.
    [Show full text]
  • New Basket of Goods and Services Being Priced in Revised
    New basket of goods and services being priced in revised CPI Beginning with January 1987 estimates, the Consumer Price Index reflects changes in Americans' spending patterns since 1972-73 ; the new index permits more accurate tracking of price changes throughout the 1980's CHARLES MASON AND CLIFFORD BUTLER The Consumer Price Index (cPi) is being revised effective Construction of the market basket with publication of data for January 1987 .' As a part of the The Consumer Price Index is a measure of the average revision, the market basket of goods and services priced for change in the price paid by urban consumers for a fixed the index is being updated to reflect how consumers are market basket of goods and services .2 The composition and spending their money. Buying patterns can change over relative weight of each component of that market basket is time as a result of changes in prices, demographic character- derived from estimates of expenditures from the ongoing istics of the population, income, or tastes and habits. Histor- Consumer Expenditure Survey. 3 The expenditure data are ically, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has updated the cps tabulated using a hierarchical system with three principal market basket approximately every 10 years. The uses of the levels of aggregation. cpi as a measure of inflation and the effects of economic The seven major expenditure groups-food and bever- policy, as a deflator of other statistical series, and as an ages, housing, apparel and upkeep, transportation, medical income or benefits escalator require that it be current and care, entertainment, and other goods and services-are dis- accurate .
    [Show full text]
  • The Purchasing Power Parity Debate
    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 18, Number 4—Fall 2004—Pages 135–158 The Purchasing Power Parity Debate Alan M. Taylor and Mark P. Taylor Our willingness to pay a certain price for foreign money must ultimately and essentially be due to the fact that this money possesses a purchasing power as against commodities and services in that country. On the other hand, when we offer so and so much of our own money, we are actually offering a purchasing power as against commodities and services in our own country. Our valuation of a foreign currency in terms of our own, therefore, mainly depends on the relative purchasing power of the two currencies in their respective countries. Gustav Cassel, economist (1922, pp. 138–39) The fundamental things apply As time goes by. Herman Hupfeld, songwriter (1931; from the film Casablanca, 1942) urchasing power parity (PPP) is a disarmingly simple theory that holds that the nominal exchange rate between two currencies should be equal to the P ratio of aggregate price levels between the two countries, so that a unit of currency of one country will have the same purchasing power in a foreign country. The PPP theory has a long history in economics, dating back several centuries, but the specific terminology of purchasing power parity was introduced in the years after World War I during the international policy debate concerning the appro- priate level for nominal exchange rates among the major industrialized countries after the large-scale inflations during and after the war (Cassel, 1918). Since then, the idea of PPP has become embedded in how many international economists think about the world.
    [Show full text]
  • [Cms-1545-P] Rin 0938-Ao64
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Part 413 [CMS-1545-P] RIN 0938-AO64 Medicare Program; Prospective Payment System and Consolidated Billing for Skilled Nursing Facilities for FY 2008 AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This proposed rule would update the payment rates used under the prospective payment system (PPS) for skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), for fiscal year (FY) 2008. In addition, this proposed rule would revise and rebase the SNF market basket, and would modify the threshold for the adjustment to account for market basket forecast error. DATES: To be assured consideration, comments must be received at one of the addresses provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on [OFR--insert date 60 days after date of display in the Federal Register]. ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to file code CMS-1545-P. Because of staff and resource limitations, we cannot accept comments by facsimile (FAX) transmission. You may submit comments in one of four ways (no duplicates, please): CMS-1545-P 2 1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on specific issues in this regulation to http://www.cms.hhs.gov/eRulemaking. Click on the link “Submit electronic comments on CMS regulations with an open comment period.” (Attachments should be in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or Excel; however, we prefer Microsoft Word.) 2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments (one original and two copies) to the following address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: CMS-1545-P, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Uzbekistan: Welfare Impact of Slow Transition
    UZBEKISTAN: WELFARE IMPACT OF SLOW TRANSITION Richard Pomfret, Professor of Economics University of Adelaide, Australia Kathryn H. Anderson, Director Graduate Program in Economic Development Vanderbilt University, Nashville TN, USA June 1997 This study has been prepared within the UNU/WIDER project on Poverty and Well-Being in Asia during the Transition (a component of the research on Poverty, Income Distribution and Well-Being during the Transition), which is co-directed by Dr Manuel F. Montes, Senior Research Fellow, UNU/WIDER; and Dr Aiguo Lu, Research Fellow, UNU/WIDER. UNU/WIDER gratefully acknowledges the support to the project by the United Nations Development Programme. The authors are grateful to Jeni Klugman and Manuel Montes for helpful comments on an earlier draft. CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iv ABSTRACT v UZBEKISTAN: WELFARE IMPACT OF SLOW TRANSITION 1 I INTRODUCTION 2 1. Development strategy and its recent changes 2 2. A brief historical account of the welfare situation 5 II CHANGES OF WELFARE INDICATORS 6 1. Economic indicators 6 2. Capability-based indicators 8 2.1 Health 8 2.2 Education 10 2.3 Nutrition 12 3. Demographic-based indicators 13 4. Environment-based indicators 14 5. Assessment of changes 17 III MACRO AND MICRO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ON WELFARE CHANGES 18 1. Monetary, fiscal, and price liberalization policies 19 2. Privatization and enterprise reform 20 3. Foreign trade and exchange rate policies 22 4. Conclusions 23 IV IMPACT OF SOCIAL POLICIES ON WELFARE CHANGES 24 1. Taxation 24 2. Public expenditure 26 3. Structural policies 28 V RESPONSES TO SHOCK OR GRADUAL CHANGES 29 VI CONCLUSIONS 31 REFERENCES 33 ANNEX: TURKMENISTAN: NON-REFORM IN A RESOURCE-RICH ECONOMY 36 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Progress in institutional reform 39 Table 2 General government spending, 1992-95 40 Table 3 Output and inflation performance 41 Table 4 Socioeconomic indicators for the Central Asian republics 42 ABSTRACT Uzbekistan is typically seen as one of the slowest reformers among the countries in transition from central planning to a market-oriented economy.
    [Show full text]
  • International Price Comparisons Based on Purchasing Power Parity
    Purchasing Power Parity International price comparisons based on purchasing power parity Because exchange rate movements, in general, tend to be more volatile than changes in national price levels, the purchasing power parity approach provides the proper basis for comparing living standards and examining productivity levels over time Michelle A. Vachris magine you are planning a trip to France and using exchange rates to convert them into a and and would like to figure out how much cur- single currency would not yield an accurate com- James Thomas I rency you will need during your visit. You parison. Again, the comparison based on ex- would need to know how much in French francs change rates does not take into account differ- it would cost for incidentals such as meals, ing prices among the countries. sightseeing, and souvenirs. What information In each of these scenarios, analysts could con- would be helpful to you in making your estimate? struct better estimates if they convert the data You could check the price of, say, a lunch in your into a common currency and value it at the same hometown and then convert that figure into francs price levels. In September 1998, the Organisa- using the exchange rate. This type of estimate tion for Economic Co-operation and Develop- would not be very accurate, however, because it ment (OECD) released price level data and mea- is likely that a lunch in your hometown costs rela- sures for 1996 as a part of the Eurostat-OECD tively more or less than a lunch in France. A bet- purchasing power parity (PPP) program.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 84/Friday, May 1, 2015/Proposed
    25012 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 84 / Friday, May 1, 2015 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND address ONLY: Centers for Medicare & psychiatric facility quality reporting HUMAN SERVICES Medicaid Services, Department of program. Health and Human Services, Attention: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid CMS–1627–P, P.O. Box 8010, Baltimore, Services MD 21244–1850. Availability of Certain Tables Please allow sufficient time for mailed Exclusively Through the Internet on the 42 CFR Part 412 comments to be received before the CMS Web Site [CMS–1627–P] close of the comment period. In the past, tables setting forth the 3. By express or overnight mail. You Wage Index for Urban Areas Based on RIN 0938–AS47 may send written comments to the CBSA Labor Market Areas and the Wage following address ONLY: Centers for Index Based on CBSA Labor Market Medicare Program; Inpatient Medicare & Medicaid Services, Areas for Rural Areas were published in Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Department of Health and Human the Federal Register as an Addendum to Payment System—Update for Fiscal Services, Attention: CMS–1627–P, Mail the annual PPS rulemaking (that is, the Year Beginning October 1, 2015 (FY Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security PPS proposed and final rules or, when 2016) Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. applicable, the current update notice). AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 4. By hand or courier. Alternatively, However, beginning in FY 2015, these Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. you may deliver (by hand or courier) wage index tables are no longer ACTION: Proposed rule. your written comments ONLY to the published in the Federal Register.
    [Show full text]